Full text of "Stellar evolution of massive stars with a radiative alpha-omega dynamo"

See other formats

Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 000, 000-000 (0000) Printed 5 March 2013 (MN style file v2.2)

Stellar evolution of massive stars with a radiative
alpha— omega dynamo

>
o

Adrian T. Potter 1 *, Shashikumar M. Chitre 2 and Christopher A. Tout 1

1 Institute of Astronomy, The Observatories, Madingley Road, Cambridge CBS 0HA

2 Centre for Excellence in Basic Sciences, University of Mumbai

Accepted 2012 May 29. Received 2012 May 28; in original form 2012 April 3

ABSTRACT

Models of rotationally-driven dynamos in stellar radiative zones have suggested
that magnetohydro dynamic transport of angular momentum and chemical compo-
sition can dominate over the otherwise purely hydrodynamic processes. A proper
consideration of the interaction between rotation and magnetic fields is therefore
essential. Previous studies have focused on a magnetic model where the magnetic
field strength is derived as a function of the stellar structure and angular momentum
distribution. We have adapted our one-dimensional stellar rotation code, ROSE, to
model the poloidal and toroidal magnetic field strengths with a pair of time-dependent
advection-diffusion equations coupled to the equations for the evolution of the angu-
lar momentum distribution and stellar structure. This produces a much more com-
plete, though still reasonably simple, model for the magnetic field evolution. Our
model reproduces well observed surface nitrogen enrichment of massive stars in the
Large Magellanic Cloud. In particular it reproduces a population of slowly-rotating
nitrogen-enriched stars that cannot be explained by rotational mixing alone alongside
the traditional rotationlly-enriched stars. The model further predicts a strong mass-
dependency for the dynamo-driven field. Above a threshold mass, the strength of the
magnetic dynamo decreases abruptly and so we predict that more massive stars are
much less likely to support a dynamo-driven field than less massive stars.

Key words: stars:evolution, stars:general, stars:magnetic field, stars:rotation,
stars:abundances, starsxhemically peculiar

1 INTRODUCTION

The study of rotation in the radiative zones of stars is
strongly coupled with the evolution of magnetic fields.
Observation of stellar magnetic fields is difficult but a
number of magneti c O and B stars have been discovered
jDonati et alj l200ll. |2002l: iNeiner et alj|2003t iDonati et all
l2006al lbl; iGrunhut et alj|201ll ). Combined with this, a num-
ber of chemically peculiar A and B stars (known as Ap
and Bp stars respectively) with sur face field strengths
up to 20kG have been identified (e.g. iBorra &: LandstreetJ
1 19781 ; iBagnulo et alj |2004 iHubrig et alj 120051 ). We direct
the reader to lMathva ((2009J) for a review. These large-scale
fields tend to have simple geometries and there is debate
over whether they arise from fos s il fields present du ring
a star's formation (jCowlind 1 19451 ; lAlecian et all 120081 ) or
from a rotationally- driven dynamo operating in the radia -
tive zone of the star l|Spruitlll999l ; iMaeder fe Mevnetj|2004) .

* E-mail: apotter@ast.cam.ac.uk

In this paper we focus on the latter but we give consider-
ation to whether a fossil field can be sustained throughout
the stellar lifetime.

In low-mass stars, where the outer region is convective,
magnetic fields are expected to be formed in a strong shear
layer at the base of the convection zone and then trans-
porte d to the surfac e by convection and magnetic buoy-
ancy llNordhaudbOlol ). In radiative zones there is no strong
bulk motion to redistribute magnetic energy. In most dy-
namo models, magnet ic flux is red istributed by magneto-
rotational turbulence (|Spruitll2002l ). This turbulence is also
responsible for driving the generation of large-scale mag -
netic flux. This is the a-effect (e.g. iBrandenburd 12001 )
which applies to both poloidal and toroidal components,
although in rotating systems shear is generally more effec-
tive at producing toroidal field from the poloidal compo-
nent and so the a-effect is needed for the poloidal field only.
The toroidal field is instead maintained by the conversion of
poloidal field into toroidal field by differential rotation. This

2 A. T. Potter, S. M. Chitre, C. A. Tout

is com monly referred to as an a-Q dynamo (|Schmalz fc Stbd

Because observed fields are potentially strong enough
to affect chemical mixing and angular momentum transport,
their inclusion in stellar evolution models is essential. Rota-
tion itself is a likely candidate to drive dy namo mecha nisms
within a star and theoretical models (e.g. ISpruitlfl999l ) have
predicted magnetic fields that can produce turbulent insta-
bilities which dominate the transport of angular momentum.
Whilst the purely hydrodynamic evolution of the angular
momentum distribution in main-sequence stars has been
considered extensively in the fram ework of one-dimensional
stellar evolution calculations (e.g. iMevnet fc Maed"erll2000l :
iHeger etji l. 2000), magnetic field s have received far l ess at-
tention ijMaeder fc Mevnetl 120041 : iBrott et alJl2011al ). The
evolution of the angular momentum distribution and mag-
netic field strength have a significant effect on the final fate
of a star and its ejecta.

Apart from causing chemical mixing, sufficiently strong
magnetic fields are expected to cause magnetic braking that
results in the rapid spin down of rotating magnetic stars
l|Mathvsll2004h . It has been suggested that magnetic fields
might explain the existence of slowly-rotatin g, chemically
pecu liar stars in surveys of rotating stars ( Hunter et al.l
2009). We include a model for magnetic braking based on
that of lud-Doula fc Owockil ||2002h and show the effects it
has on the models of magnetic stars.

Many studies of magnetic fields in massive main-
sequen ce stars cons ider the Tayler-Spruit dynamo mech-
anism (jSpruitl [20021) . Thi s model assert s that pinch-type
instabilities (jTavlerl 1 19731 : ISpruid 1 19991 ) arise in toroidal
fields that drive magnetic turbulence that enforces solid-
body rotation. The growth of instabilities is controlled by
magnetic diffusion which ultimately determines the equi-
librium strength o f the field. This idea was built upon by
iMaeder fc Mevnetl ()2004l ) who found that the Tayler-Spruit
dynamo did indeed result in far less differential rotation
than in solely hydrod ynamic mod e ls. It w as also incorpo-
rated in the work of IBrott et al.1 l|2011al ) who compared
stellar evolution calculations based on the Tayler-Spruit dy-
namo with the data from the VLT-FLA MES survey of mas-
sive stars (e.g. I Evans et al ] |2005l .l 20061 ). They found reason-
able agreement betw een the obs erved and simulated s amples
l|Brott et al.l l2011bl ). However. IPotter et al.1 (|2012bl) found
equally good agreement between the data from the VLT-
FLAMES suryevjuidpundy hydr odynamic models based o n
models of lHeger et al.f (120001) andlMevnet fc Maedeij tod)

In the models of of lSpruitJ (j2002T ) and lMaeder fc Mevnetl
(2004), the magnetic field is purely a function of the stel-
lar structure and rotation. Whilst it feeds back on the sys-
tem via turbulent diffusivities, the magnetic field doesn't ap-
pear as an independent variable within the s ystem. I n this
work we have continued along similar lines to Ispruitl (I2002T )
but have developed a magnetic model where the poloidal
and toroidal components are evolved via advection-diffusion
equations derived from the induction equation. These are
similar in form to the angular momentum evolution equa-
tion. The magnetic field and angular momentum evolution
are coupled by turbulent diffusivities, magnetic stresses and
conversion of poloidal field into toroidal field by differential
rotation. The dynamo is completed by regeneration of mag-
netic flux by a simple a-il dynamo. We look at how the

predicted surface magnetic field varies with age and rota-
tion rate for a range of initial masses and how a simulated
population of magnetic stars compares to the data from th e
VLT-FLAMES survey of massive stars (|Dufton et alj|2006l ).
We also consider how our model behaves with a strong initial
fossil field but without the action of a dynamo.

In section [2] we briefly review the model we use to simu-
late the magnetic fields including the equations for the a-Q
dynamo and magnetic braking. In section [3] we look at the
predictions of the model for a range of stellar masses and ini-
tial rotation rates and how simulated populations compare
with observations, in section[4]we present a discussion of the
results and in section [5] we give our concluding remarks.

2 ROTATING MAGNETIC MODEL

In order to simulate the magnetic fi eld in stellar interior s we
build on the code ROSE described in IPotter et all l|2012al ) for
one-dimensional stellar evolution calculations which include
purely hydrodynamic angular momentum evolution. The
code is based on the Cambridge stellar evolution code stars
l|Eggletonlll97ll : IPols et al.fl995l : IStancliffe fc Eldridgdl2009h
and incorpor ates a number of different models for stellar
rotat ion (e.g. iTalon et af1ll997l: IHeger et all I2OO0I ; iMaederl
l2003h as described in IPotter et all (|2012al ^. The evolution
of the angul ar momentu m is based on the shellular rotation
hypothesis l|Zahnl 0*9921 ) and treats the angular momentum
evolution with a one-dimensional advection-diffusion equa-
tion.

2.1 Magnetic field evolution

We approach the evolution of the magnetic fields in a similar
way to the evolution of the angular momentum distribution.
In the radiative zones of stars, turbulence from purely rota-
tional or magnetorotational instabilities leads to the gener-
ation of magnetic field by an afi-dynamo mechanism. We
assume a background velocity field of the form

[/= <^ U(r)P 2 (cose),V(r)

dP 2 (c

, Q(r)r sin 8

(1)

where Piix) is the 2nd Legendre polynomial and U(r) and
V(r) are the components of the meridional circulation and
are related by the continuity equation

1 d I 2 rn

(2)

The radial component, U(r), is taken to be the same as de-
scribe d bv lPotter et al.l (|2012al ) based on lMaeder fc Mevnetl
(2000). It has been suggested that meridional circulation
can be neglected in the presence of strong magnetic fields
jMaeder fc Mevnetl l2003). We discuss whether this is indi-
cated by our model in section [3~2l For now we leave it in our
equations for completeness.

The evolution of the large-scale magnetic field is de-
scribed by the induction equation

^=Vx(lfxB)-Vx(j|VxB). (3)

Stellar evolution with a radiative dynamo 3

Assuming an azimuthal form for the mean field we may write
B as

B = B 4> (r,e)e 4> + Vx(A(r,e)e 4> ). (4)
Substituting equations |T} and Q into <(3j gives

dB^ „ . n dQ n . n dQ

1 8 / dP 2 (cosfl)
r 90 r W dfl B *

~ (ri7(r)P 2 (cose)B^)-
r ar

and

(V x („V x B)) .

OA _ 2V(r) dP 2 (cos

(5)

(16

-Acote-

U (r)P 2 ( cos 9) dAr .

— SI

sin 9+

aB^ - V x (r)V x Ae^),

(6)

where we have introduced the a-term in equation ([6]) to
describ e the regeneration of the poloidal field by the dy-
namo l|Schmalz fc Stixl |l991). The radial and latitudinal
components of the magnetic field are B r and Be respec-
tively. Under the assumption of shellular rotation, the term

Bedn/ae sine = o.

In order to reduce the equations to one dimension we
need to choose the ^-dependence of the magnetic field and
perform a suitable latitudinal average of equations ((5} and
((SJl . First we choose A(r, 6) = A(r) sin 6 so that in the
limit of no meridional circulation or magnetic stresses, the
poloidal field tends towards a dipolar geometry. Under this
assumption B r — 2Acos8/r and Be = — A(rA)/Ar sin 9. We
could equally choose a quadrupolar or higher order geome-
try but we start with this as the simplest case. The radial
field has negative parity about the equator so this must also
be true of the toroidal field. The toroidal field must also van-
ish at the poles to avoid singularities. We therefore choose
B</> = B^(r) sin(2#). Again, this is not a unique choice but is
the lowest order Fourier mode that meets our requirements.
Finally we take a = &{r) and r] — fj(r).

We take the average of a quantity q to be

<9>

r/2

qsm9A9

q sin 9 AO.

(7)

tt/2

The second identity holds because of our choice of parity
for the various terms in equations (0 and Hereinafter
we drop the use of angled brackets and write q = q for the
radially-dependent components of the magnetic field and
related quantities. Taking averages of equations (0 and (JS])
we get

dB^ an e l a ( n a 3 ,

dt dr 5r lOr dr\r 4 dr

(8)

and

m = ^ A -8-rdr^ + ^ + ar > ' ^

In the case where diffusion dominates, A — > 1/r 2 and
— > 1/r 3 . This is what we expect for a dipolar field. Our
boundary conditions are B^ = and Be oc d(rA)/dr — at
r = and R*.

2.2 Evolution of the angular momentum
distribution

In the Taylor-Spruit dvnamo lSpruitl (|2002h angular momen-
tum transport is driven by the Maxwell stress produced by
the magnetic field. This process is assumed diffusive and
an effective diffusion coefficient is derived. We treat the an-
gular momentu m evolution in radiat ive zones by extending
equation (12) of [Potter etafl (1201281 ) to

d(r 2 fl) _ 1 d(pr 4 QU) 3r

5pr 2

((V x B) x B)^+

i d ( 4 an

pr A or \ or

(10)

where the pre-factor in the magnetic stress term comes
from the combination of a factor of 1/47T for the perme-
ability of free space and 3/2 from the spherical average,
(r 2 sin 2 6) , on the left-hand side. The term D to t is the total
diffusion of angular momentum that arises from a combi-
nation of purely rotationally-driven turbulence, magneto-
rotational turbulence and convection. Purely hydrodynamic
turbulence comes from Kelvin-Helmholtz instabilities that
are driven by shear. We refer to this diffusion coefficient
as Dkh- There are other sources of hydrodynamic turbu-
lence, including an effective diffusion owing to the merid-
ional circulation, but we shall grou p these all in Dkh- We
us e the formulat ion of iPotter et alj l|2012ah . based on that
of lMaederl (|2003l ). but other formulation s may be used in-
stead, described by IPotter et alj l|2012bl ). The diffusion by
convective transport is D C on and is based on the effectiv e
diffusion from mixing-length theory l|Bohm-Vitensel fl958l ) .
Finally the magnetic diffusion is D mag . With this notation
-Dtot = -Dkh + -D con + D mag . After averaging the magnetic
stress term in equation (|10p over co-latitude we find

d(r 2 Q) _ 1 d(pr 4 QU)

5pr 2

64pr 3 B^ dr

3 BlA) +

i a ( 4 an

pr z dr \ dr

(11)

where a factor of 8/tt appears in the Maxwell stress term
owing to the spherical average.

We see that the M axwell s tress does not act diffusively
as is often suggested. ISpruitl (|2002h equates the Maxwell
stress, S, to rpv c dfl/dr, where v e is some effective diffusiv-
ity. This automatically assumes that the large scale stresses
lead to solid body rotation and is unjustified. It leads to a
diffusion coefficient of the form v c oc (dQ/dr)~ 1 and so high
diffusion rates for small shear. We could have equally as-
sumed any similar relation such as S — (pv c /r)d(r 2 Q)/dr,
where £ e is now an effective diffusivity which drives t he sys-
tem to wards uniform specific angular momentum. For lSpniitl
(2002) this never becomes a problem because he assumes a
steady-state saturated magnetic field but it does present a
problem for systems where the magnetic field strength is in-
dependently derived. The magnetic stress term in fact acts

4 A. T. Potter, S. M. Chitre, C. A. Tout

advectively and so can increase the amount of shear in the
system.

2.3 Magnetic diffusion

Instead of relying on the large scale Maxwell stress to re-
distribute angular momentum in radiative zones, we use
the m agnetic turbulence from the Tayler-inst ability (jTavlerl
1 19731 ). Turbulent d iffusion coeffic ients for this instability
were proposed by ISpruitJ |2002) and iMaeder fc Mevnetl
We follow a similar method to derive the associ-
ated diffusion coefficients here. The main difference is that
we solve for the magnetic field and hence the Alfven veloc-
ity independently instead of treating it as a function of the
rotation rate.

First, the energy of the instability must be enough to
overcome the restoring buoyancy force. This puts a limit on
the vertical extent of the magnetic instability

is the mass fraction of element i. Similarly we take the mag-
netic diffusivity to be r/ = Pr m -D mag where Pr m is the turbu-
lent magnetic Prandtl number. We look at the effect of vary-
ing these two parameters in section 13.71 but we expect the
magn etic Prandtl number to be of order unity (|Yousef et al.l
l2003h .

2.4 Dynamo model

We describe the dynamo generation parameter by tak-
ing a — 7r/"r a where 7 is an efficiency parameter and
r a is the amplific a tion t ime scale of the field. Following
IMaeder fc Mevnetl l|2004T ) we take r a = N/uj A ^q where
q — 9(logn)/9(logr). Combining these our dynamo effi-
ciency is given by

; 7"

N '

(18)

lr <

tuja
N :

(12)

where ui\ « B^/Anr 2 p is the Alfven frequency and N is the
relevant buoyancy frequency. If this length scale is to o small
then t he magnetic diffusivity damps the instability. ISpruitJ
(2002) takes this limit to be

,2 »?n

(13)

When account is taken of the thermal diffu s ivity, the buoy-
ancy frequency given by iMaeder fc Mevnetl l|2004 ) is

2.5 Magnetic braking

Strongly magnetic intermediate-mass stars typically have
rotation rat es much slowe r than other stars in their parent
population (|Mathvsll2004r ). If the Alfven radius, the radius
at which the magnetic energy density is the same as the ki-
netic energy density in the stellar wind, is larger than the
stellar radius then magnetic braking allows additional an-
gular momentum to be carried away by the stellar wind.
Consider equation (|10|l . Writing J Q m dm = J^4-Kr 2 pdr we
obtain the boundary condition for angular momentum loss
from the surface

rj/K + 2

(14)

where K is the thermal diffusivity, iV T is the Brunt- Vaisala
frequency and N 2 is the frequency associated with the mean
molecular weight gradient. Substituting equation (114[l into
equations (|12|l and (|13[1 gives a quadratic equation for 77,

{Ni + Nl)rf + [2KNl

2 4
r uj a

2Kr 2 io A = 0. (15)

In th e limit N 2 Nt and K <C r/ we recover equa-
tion (1) of lMaeder fc Mevnetl \2004 ) and in the limit N 2 <
N% and K 3> r\ we recover their equation (2). In most cases
we find that K 3> 77 and iV T 3> in which case we get

'/ ;

r 2 Q.

1/2

r 2 N 7

1/2

(16)

In equation (|15|) we make the substitution r\ = C m ?/ where
C m is a calibration constant which we expect to be of or-
der unity. The chemical composition of the star evolves in
radiative zones according to the equation

di/tot . „4 „
— — = 4tt J? 4 pD tot
at

(19)

where dif t ot/di is the total rate of angular momentum loss
from the star and is given by

clHtot
dt

= R A QM = aJ sult .

(20)

The Alfven radius is Ra, cr = Ra/R and J SU rf is the specific
angular m omentum at the surface of t he star. Following the
analysis of lud-Doula fc Owockil {2002) we can calculate the
magnetic efficiency

BlR 2 (j)- 4

(21)

where v x = v CBC = \/2g c gR and v CB c is the escape velocity at
the stellar surface. We have assumed that the external field is
dipolar (q = 3). The Alfven radius is typically taken where
the dynamo efficiency equals unity. Rearranging equation
(|21|l . and setting cf> — 1 and a — r / R — Ra/R at r — Ra we
find

dXj _ 1 d ( PTcDtotr 2dXi

dt r 2 dr \ ° ° dr

BlR 2

Mv csc

(22)

where Pr c is the turbulent chemical Prandtl number and X;

We assume a S> 1 so that

Stellar evolution with a radiative dynamo 5

BIB?

M v csc

(23)

for the remainder of this paper. If Ra < R then we take
(7 = 1 so that, as star loses mass, material carries away the
specific angular momentum of the material at the surface.
When we approach this limit we should calculate a exactly
from (122 f} but for now we assume that (|23|) remains valid.
In section 13.31 we typically find either strong fields where
a 2> 1 or very weak fields where we can safely take a = 1.
So far we have been unable to p r oduce a stable model for
the mass- lo ss rate s of lVink et ail (|200ll ) and so use the rate
of iReimersl (| 19751 ) in equation (|23p . For intermediate-mass
stars on the main sequence this approximation is reasonably
accurate.

2.6 Free parameters

Like most theories for stellar rotation and magnetic field evo-
lution we have produced a closed model which depends on
a number of free parameters. We look at typical physically
motivated values for these parameters in section [3T71 and also
the effect of varying them. In total we have four free param-
eters. The parameter C m affects the overall strength of the
turbulent diffusivity. The magnetic and chemical Prandtl
numbers, Pr m and Pr c , describe how efficiently the turbu-
lent diffusivity transports magnetic flux and chemical com-
position compared to angular momentum. And 7 affects the
strength of the dynamo generation. Whilst Pr m and C m are
both expected to be of order unity we have left them as free
parameters for the moment to maintain of generality.

3 RESULTS

We simulated a grid of models with masses 4 < Mj Mq< 24
and initial rotation rates < nini/kms" 1 < 600, except
where the initial rotation rate is greater than the critical
rotation rate of the star. All of the mode l s descr ibed are
at LMC metallicity as used bv lBrott et~aH |2011al ). We set
C m = 1 and Pr m = 1. We also set 7 = 10~ 15 which results
in a maximum field strength across the whole population
of B ~ 20 kG. The maximum terminal-age main-sequence
(TAMS) nitrogen enrichment in the simulated magnetic
population, including observational constraints, is matched
with the maximum en r ichme nt in the slowly rotating popu-
lation of lHunter et al.l |2009l '). This gives Pr c = 0.01. In each
model the rotation and magnetic field were allowed to relax
to equilibrium at the zero-age main sequence (ZAMS). The
grid of initial models is shown in Fig. [1] which also shows the
ZAMS surface field strength in each model. We will look at
this in more detail in section 13.31

3.1 Magnetic field evolution

Owing to the strong magnetically-induced turbulence, the
toroidal field behaves roughly as B^, oc r -3 and the poloidal
field behaves as A oc r~ 2 so both are much stronger towards
the core than at the surface of the star as shown in Fig. [2]
The toroidal field falls to zero within a very narrow region

700

600

500

T 400

300

200

100

□

Af/M s

i — ^1800
1600
1400
1200
H1000

800 1
1600
1 400
1 200

Figure 1. Grid of models considered in section [3] The colour
of each point indicates the surface field strength at the zero-age
main sequence.

near the surface of the star to meet the boundary condi-
tions. The strength of the toroidal field predicted is around
nine orders of magnitude larger than the poloidal field. This
is because the fi-effect, the conversion of poloidal field into
toroidal field by differential rotation, is much stronger than
the a-efiect which regenerates the poloidal field. We take the
surface value of the field to be the strength of the toroidal
field just below the boundary layer. If we were instead to
take the poloidal field, we would need a larger value of 7
to produce a stronger field. In this case the toroidal field
is around six orders of magnitude larger than the poloidal
field. So a surface poloidal field of 10 3 G would correspond
to a toroidal field of 10 9 G just below the surface. The fields
then increase by several orders of magnitude towards the
core. Not only do these field strengths seem unreasonably
energetic but also the magnetic stresses result in cores that
are spinning near or above break-up velocity. However, spec-
tropolarimetric observations have concluded that the large-
scale structure of the external magnetic fields of massive
stars are largely dipolar so there must be some mechanism
for converting the toroidal field into poloidal field at the sur-
face. It is likely that the stellar wind stretches the field lines
in the radial direction, changing the toroidal field to a ra-
dial geometry as material is ejected from the stellar surface
(|Parker!ll95a ).

Owing to the very large value for D con predicted from
mixing-length theory, the predicted field is extremely weak
within the convective core. This is somewhat at odds with
our observations in the Sun where large-scale magnetic flux
can be transported through a convective region without be-
ing destroyed. It may be that convection is better treated
by an anisotropic diffusivity. Certainly in the Sun, where the
outer envelope is convective, we see latitudinal variations in
the surface angular velocity whic h we have ig nored owing to
the shellular rotation hypothesis (|Zahnl 1992) which applies

6 A. T. Potter, S. M. Chitre, C. A. Tout

Figure 2. Evolution of the magnetic field in a 5 Mg star initially rotating at 300kms —1 without magnetic braking. The left plot shows
the magnetic potential for the poloidal field and the right plot shows the toroidal field. The a— effect produces a weak poloidal field which
is efficiently converted into toroidal field by differential rotation. For each component, the field strength is approximately three orders of
magnitude smaller at the surface than the core. The ratio of the toroidal and poloidal field strengths is of the order 10 9 .

1.0x10*
8.0X10 3
O 6.0xl0 3
4.0xlO J

2.0xlO J -

O.OxlO 1 '

"i 1 r

Without braking -
With braking

Figure 3. Evolution of the surface magnetic field strength in
a 5 Mo star initially rotating at 300 km s -1 with and without
magnetic braking. The surface field strength shows only a slight
degree of variation during the main sequence when there is no
magnetic braking. When magnetic braking is included the field
strength peaks sharply after the ZAMS and then decays away
rapidly. However, the field strength at the end of the main se-
quence is still several hundred Gauss.

to the radiative zones of massive stars. Therefore this does
not strongly affect our model but deserves further consider-
ation in the future.

We first consider models in the absence of magnetic
braking in order to distinguish evolutionary effects owing to
the dynamo from those caused by braking. In this case, al-
though the surface field only exhibits a small degree of vari-
ation (Fig. EI , the magnetic field inside the star becomes sig-
nificantly stronger during the course of the main sequence.
The surface magnetic field reaches a peak strength and then
weakens towards the end of the main sequence. However,
this change is always within a factor of thr ee of the ZAMS
value. This is consistent with the model of iTout fc Pringlc

(| 19961 ) in which Ae/Be stars tap rotational energy early in
their lives. The enhancement of the field inside the star is
largely because the Brunt -Vaisala frequency decreases as
the star expands during the main sequence. It is also partly
because the amount of differential rotation increases as a
result of the changing hydrostatic structure of the star.

We might intuitively expect that the spin down of the
star owing to magnetic braking would cause the magnetic
field to decay rapidly and this is true later in the life of the
star. However, the inclusion of magnetic braking first leads
to a significant enhancement of the magnetic field shortly af-
ter the ZAMS. When braking is included, the loss of angular
momentum from the surface is so fast that diffusion of an-
gular momentum cannot prevent a build up of shear within
the radiative envelope. This drives additional generation of
magnetic flux through the a-tt dynamo and actually causes
a much stronger peak field than without magnetic braking.
The magnetic diffusion eventually reduces the amount of dif-
ferential rotation and the magnetic spin down results in a
weaker dynamo and faster rate of field decay. However, the
field remains sufficiently large throughout the main sequence
that the rate of chemical transport is still large enough to
cause a significant amount of nitrogen enrichment. We dis-
cuss this further in section 13.61 Although the eventual de-
cay of the surface field in the presence of magnetic braking
is quite rapid, the field strength at the end of the main se-
quence is still several hundred Gauss. This is consistent with
the observati on that all chemica lly peculiar Ap stars have
strong fields l|Auriere et all 120071 ).

3.2 Effect on angular momentum distribution

The effect of the magnetic field on the angular momentum
distribution of a star has profound implications for its chem-
ical evolution and the properties of its remnant. Shear arises
in stars mostly as a result of changes in the structure from
ongoing evolution and mass loss. Rotation also causes merid-
ional circulation in stars. This contributes to the shear as we
discussed in section 13.21 In the magnetic case, where mag-

Stellar evolution with a radiative dynamo 7

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Figure 4. Evolution of the surface magnetic field strengths in
4Mq, 6Mq and 10 Mq stars initially rotating at 300 km s
with an a-Q dynamo and magnetic braking. The maximum field
strength is much greater in less massive stars. For all masses of
star, the field strength increases sharply at the start of the main
sequence owing to the rapid loss of angular momentum at the sur-
face because of magnetic braking. This causes differential rotation
which drives additional flux generation by the dynamo. This peak
occurs later for more massive stars both in absolute time and as a
fraction of their main-sequence lifetime. Following this, the field
decays rapidly over the remainder of the main sequence.

netic braking is included, meridional circulation dominates
over the magnetic stresses at the ZAMS for almost the en-
tire star. For a 5Mq star initially rotating at 300 km s -1 the
meridional circulation is approximately six orders of magni-
tude stronger in the outer layers than the magnetic stresses
at the ZAMS. Through most of the envelope the difference is
between one and three orders of magnitude. However, when
the magnetic field grows rapidly shortly after the ZAMS and
magnetic braking begins to rapidly spin down the star this
reverses and the magnetic stresses become much more im-
portant than the meridional circulation for the remainder
of the main sequence. As we see in Fig 2] this peak occurs
later for more massive stars as a fraction of main-sequence
lifetime and so the meridional circulation can dominate for
longer. Therefore, whilst it is true that the meridional circu-
lation has little effect on the evolution of magnetic stars for
most of the main sequence, it is not necessarily true close to
the ZAMS. This also suggests that the circulation terms in
the induction equation, which we ignore in this paper, may
in fact make a significant contribution to the transport of
magnetic flux.

Apart from the physical effects that produce shear
within the radiative envelope the other major factor that
affects the angular momentum distribution is the strength
of the turbulent diffusion. We have plotted the major diffu-
sion coefficients at the ZAMS for a 5Mq star initially ro-
tating at 300 km s" 1 in Fig. [5] The overall diffusion coeffi-
cient predicted by the magnetic model is significantly larger
than produced by hydrodynamic turbulence alone. We note
that Dkh oc (dQ/dr) 2 predicted in the magnetic model is
significantly lower than in the non-magnetic model. Whilst
magnetic stresses should produce more shear than in the
non-magnetic model, the diffusion coefficient is sufficiently

high to cause an overall reduction in shear. This is illus-
trated in Fig. [6] where we have plotted the evolution of the
angular momentum distribution for the same star without
a magnetic field, with a magnetic field but without brak-
ing and with both a magnetic field and braking. There is a
small region near the convective core in the magnetic star
where the magnetic diffusion becomes much smaller owing
to mean molecular weight gradients. In this region the hy-
drodynamic turbulence dominates. This region only exists
at the start of the ZAMS because the field becomes much
stronger shortly after and the effects of rotation decrease as
magnetic braking spins the star down.

In Fig.[6]we see that, in the magnetic star without brak-
ing, there is far less differential rotation throughout the star
than in the non-magnetic star. This also means that the
cores of magnetic stars are likely to be rotating more slowly
than non-magnetic stars even before the effects of braking
are included. When braking is included we see much the
same trend except, in the model with magnetic braking, the
whole star spins down rapidly. The typical Alfven radius for
this star is approximately 50, meaning that the rate of an-
gular momentum loss is several thousand times faster than
without a magnetic field. We note that there is far more dif-
ferential rotation in this star compared with the magnetic
star without braking. This is because of the rapid loss of
angular momentum from the surface of the star.

3.3 Mass— rotation relation of the main— sequence
field strength

Historically the presence of strong magnetic fields in massive
stars has been thought to be mainly con fined to A sta rs and
perhaps some of the lower-mass B stars l|Mathvsll2009l ). This
may have been because of the difficulty in observing mag-
netic effec ts in the broad abso rption features of more mas-
sive stars IjPetit fc W ade 2011). However, as the amount of
available da ta has grown, tha nks to surveys such as MiMeS
project (e.g. lWade et al.ll2009l ). it has become clear that this
is not caused simply by selection effects.

By applying our model to the grid shown in Fig. \T\ we
are able to track the evolution of the surface field strength
of stars and, in particular, how it varies with mass and rota-
tion rate. We show this dependence at the ZAMS in Fig. [7]
It is immediately apparent that although stars less mas-
sive than around 15 Mq are able to sustain significant fields,
no significant field is predicted in more massive stars ex-
cept in very slow rotators. Even for high-mass, slow rota-
tors the field doesn't exceed 200 G. The transition between a
strong ZAMS field and no field is sharpest in rapid rotators.
This transition is caused by the interaction between hydro-
dynamic and magnetic turbulence. If Dkh exceeds -D mag for
a sufficiently large region of the radiative envelope, the mag-
netic field decays exponentially and cannot be sustained by
the dynamo. Because a oc uja, the strength of the dynamo
weakens with the magnetic field. In the case where D mag is
the dominant turbulent process, this is matched by a greater
reduction in the turbulent diffusivity because, for most of the
envelope, D mag oc uj\. As the diffusivity drops, the field is
less efficiently dissipated and so an equilibrium is reached.
When Dkh dominates and the field decays the diffusivity is
largely unaffected and so the dynamo continues to weaken
causing the field to completely disappear. At higher masses

8 A. T. Potter, S. M. Chitre, C. A. Tout

10'

10°

10-

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

D KH -

D pnn ■

con —

*
%

_ 1

1
1

- 1

„

; ,1

r- '

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

m/M

Figure 5. Diffusivities for the angular momentum resulting from convection, hydrodynamic and magnetohydrodynamic effects in a 5 Mq
star initially rotating at 300 kms" 1 . The left plot is for a magnetic star whereas the right plot is for a non-magnetic star. We note
that the model predicts more efficient transport by magnetic effects compared to purely hydrodynamic effects. We also note that in the
magnetic star, the diffusion of angular momentum by hydrodynamic turbulence is greatly reduced because the magnetic field reduces
shear. There is a small region near the convective core where the magnetic diffusion becomes much smaller owing to mean molecular
weight gradients. In this region the hydrodynamic turbulence dominates. This region only exists at the start of the ZAMS because the
field becomes much stronger shortly after and the effects of rotation decrease as magnetic braking spins the star down.

and rotation rates Dkh is larger and so catastrophic quench-
ing occurs for lower dynamo efficiencies. Assuming that both
instabilities act in the radiative envelope, this explains why
magnetic fields are more likely to be observed in A stars and
less frequently in O and B stars.

Given that the magnetic field strength increases sharply
after the main sequence before decaying away exponentially
as discussed in section 13.11 we consider the distribution of
magnetic field strengths in a population of stars with a con-
tinuous distribution of ages. The population is shown in
Fig. [H] The population undergoes continuous star forma-
tion, is drawn from a Salpeter IMF and a Gaussian velocity
distribution with mean fj, — 145 km s -1 and standard devi-
ation a = 94kms _1 . We see that magnetic activity is high-
est in the least massive stars. As before, stars more massive
than around 15 Mq show no magnetic activity. We note that
the stars with the strongest fields fall outside the observa-
tional limits of the VLT-FLAMES survey of massive stars
l|Dufton et alj|2006h . We discuss this further in section |3"U1

We therefore predict two distinct populations of stars.
The first is a population of slowly rotating, magnetic and
chemically peculiar stars with masses less than 15 Mq. The
second is a population of more massive stars that are non-
magne tic a nd follow th e trend discussed by iHunter et al.l
(|2009l ) and lPotter et al l (|2012bT i, where rotation and nitro-
gen enrichment have a st rong positive corre lation. This is
precisely what we observe (|Hunter et al.|[2009l ). We may still
observe A stars that are rapidly rotating but not highly en-
riched. These stars should still support a strong magnetic
field but are sufficiently young that no chemical enrichment
has occurred. These rapidly rotating stars would be very in-
frequent owing to the efficient spin down by the magnetic
braking. A rapi dly rotating, highly m agnetic massive star
was observed bv lGrunhut et alj 1 20121 '). The star has a mass
of 5.5 Mq and a surface rotation velocity of 290 km s -1 but
has a surface field strength in excess of 10 kG.

3.4 Effect on the Hertzsprung— Russel diagram

Because less massive stars have stronger fields, both magnet-
ically induced mixing and magnetic braking are much more
effective in these stars. Owing to the stronger magnetic mix-
ing, chemical transport is more efficient in less massive stars
as discussed in section 13.61 As a result, more hydrogen is
mixed down into the core of less massive stars. However,
because magnetic braking causes lower-mass stars to spin
down very rapidly, the effects on brightness and tempera-
ture that arise from changes in the stellar structure in ro-
tating stars are far less apparent when magnetic fields are
introduced, as shown in Fig. [9] In the 10 Mq model we see
that the difference between the magnetic and non-magnetic
rotating models is smaller owing to the much weaker field
and hence less rapid spin down. However, in the evolution
of the 4 and 6 Mq models the magnetic stars remain barely
distinguishable from the evolution of the non-rotating stars.

3.5 The lifetime of fossil fields

An alternative to the radiative-dynamo model is that the
magnetic field originates in the material that formed the
star. If the protostellar cloud which forms a star is weakly
magnetic, conservation of magnetic energy would result in
a very strong main-sequence field. We call these fossil fields
( Brai thwaite fc Spruitj[2004T ). In order for the fossil field
model to work, the field must be able to survive the collapse
of the protostellar cloud during the star formation process.
The fossil field argument also relies on a stable field con-
figuration being reached that would avoid destruction on
main-sequence lifetimes. Ce rtain stable configurations have
been found in recent years (|Braithwaite fc Nordlundll2006i )
and simulations have suggested that ar bitrary field configu -
rations do relax to these stable states |Mathis et alj[201lh .
However, simple field configurations are still subject to the
same instabilities as the fields we have generated by dynamo

Stellar evolution with a radiative dynamo 9

1.5x10"

§ l.OxlO" 4

5.0x10""

0.0x10

2.0x10"'

1.5x10"

5.0x10

0.0x10

10"

10"'

10"

**. " " ■• ««

%=o

f/t ms =0.25

- ^ =0.5

f/t ms =0.75

i i i

m/Mr.

§ l.OxlO" 4

f/t m =0.25
f/t m =0.75

^V =1

_1_

2 3
m/M

- %f=0

■ f/t ms =0.25

: f/t ms =o.75

1 1

m/Mr.

Figure 6. Evolution of the angular momentum distribution in a
5Mq star initially rotating at 300 kms -1 . The top plot is for a
non-magnetic star, the middle plot is for a magnetic star without
braking and the bottom plot is for a magnetic star with braking.
In magnetic stars without braking, the strong magnetic turbu-
lence results in much less shear than the non-magnetic equiv-
alent. Stronger diffusion in the magnetic stars also leads to far
less differential rotation between the core and the envelope. This
causes higher surface rotation in the non-braked magnetic star
compared to the non— magnetic star. When braking is introduced
to the magnetic star it spins down rapidly. The angular momen-
tum loss from the surface leads to a much higher degree of dif-
ferential rotation in the magnetic star with braking compared to
the magnetic star without braking.

Figure 7. Main-sequence magnetic field strengths for
intermediate-mass ZAMS stars at different rotation rates.
Stars more massive than 15 Mq have almost no magnetic activity
except for a weak field in slow rotators. The strongest fields
occur in the most rapidly rotating stars with 4 < M/ Mq< 10.

Figure 8. Simulated masses and magnetic field strengths for
a population of stars drawn from the grid of models shown
in Fig. [T] The population undergoes continuous star formation,
is drawn from a Salpeter IMF and the velocity distribution is
Gaussian with mean fi = 145 kms" 1 and standard deviation
a = 94 kms^ 1 . The number of stars in each bin as a fraction
of the total number of stars is m. We see that lower-mass stars
support much stronger fields. There is very little magnetic activ-
ity in stars more massive than around 15 Mq.

10 A. T. Potter, S. M. Chitre, C. A. Tout

Non rotating
Rotating, non magnetic
Rotating, magnetic

l l l l l l l L

4.55 4.5 4.45 4.4 4.35 4.3 4.25 4.2 4.15
log 10 (r eff /K)

Figure 9. Hcrtzsprung— Russell diagram for stars with mass
4M0, 6Mq and 10 Mq. The plot shows the predicted evolution
for non— rotating stars, stars initially r otating at SOOkms - 1 but
with no magnetic field (c.f. case 1 from lPotter et al.l ll2012ah l and
magnetic stars initially rotating at 300 kms -1 . In less massive
stars magnetic braking rapidly spins down the star so the struc-
tural effects of rotation are much less apparent. In more massive
stars the effect of braking is much weaker and so the evolution is
much closer to the rotating, non— magnetic model.

1(T

10'

10 J

10"

I 4 r

~i 1 r

Dynamo-driven field ■
Fossil field

0.2

0.4

0.6

r/t„

Figure 10. Evolution of two 5Mq stars with different magnetic
field models. The first star has no magnetic dynamo (7 = 0) but
starts with a very strong initial field (B = 10 kG). The second
star uses the same dynamo model and parameters as described
in section [2] The star with an active dynamo is able to sustain
the field for longer than the star with a fossil field but, owing
to magnetic braking, both fields eventually decay exponentially.
The two stars have similar field strengths at the end of the main
sequence.

action, in particular the Tayler instability l|Tavler|[l973 ).
There are a number of other instabilities that could occur
in simple field configurations (|Parkerlll966t ) but for now we
consider only the Tayler instability.

We consider two stars, both initially rotating at
300 km s -1 . The first star starts on the ZAMS with a mag-
netic field of 10 kG but 7 = so no dynamo operates. The
second star is a rotating magnetic star with dynamo param-

eters described in section [2] The evolution of the magnetic
fields is shown in Fig. 1101 In each case, the initial field un-
dergoes some amplification at first owing to the onset of
mass and angular momentum loss and the subsequent redis-
tribution of angular momentum through the envelope. This
is much more rapid in the case of the fossil field and does
not appear in Fig. 1101 The field then decays exponentially
during the main sequence. We note that although the star
with an operating dynamo is able to prevent the field from
decaying for a short time, once magnetic braking has spun
the star down sufficiently, the dynamo can no longer main-
tain the field which then decays exponentially. The final field
strength is similar in each case.

Because the fossil field model predicts field evolution
similar to that of the dynamo model it is difficult to argue
which model is more physically accurate. However, we note
that the fossil field strength has to be several orders of mag-
nitude larger than the initial field in the case of a magnetic
dynamo in order to reproduce the same final field. The ques-
tion remains whether the fossil field argument can produce
stars with strong enough initial fields so that they remain
strong enough to influen ce chemical mixing in the star dur-
ing the main sequence. [Moss (2003) examined how much
magnetic flux could potentially survive to the ZAMS from
the pre-main sequence. He found that a significant fraction
of flux could survive but only if the magnetic diffusivity was
sufficiently low. Above this limit, no flux was expected to
survive. The fossil field must also reproduce the two dis-
tinct observed populations in the Hunter diagram, shown
in Fig. 1111 discussed further in section 13.61 One could ar-
gue that this depends on the distribution of magnetic field
strengths in protostellar clouds but the fossil field model
must then also explain the mass-dependent distribution of
field strengths observed in massive stars. Thus far we have
come across no arguments that accurately reproduce these
features of observed populations for fossil fields.

3.6 Effect on surface composition

The Hunter diagram (|Hunter et alJfe oQQ) is a plot of the sur-
face nitrogen abundance in a star against sur face velocity.
The VLT-FL AMES survey of massive stars l|Evans et al.l
120051 , l2006l ; iDufton et al] I2OO6I ) resulted in a significant
amount of data on the nitrogen abundances in rotating stars
in a nu mber of samples from the Milky Way and Magellanic
Clouds (|Hunter et alj [20091 ). In particular it was observed
that there exists a class of stars that are slowly rotating
(v < 60kms _1 ) but exhibit significant nitrogen enrichment.
It was suggested that these stars are, or once were, mag-
netic stars. If we extend the Hunter diagram to consider the
effective temperature of each star as shown in Fig. [TT] we
do not see a significant temperature variation between the
two groups but we note that the mass range of stars in this
sample is only 8 < M/Mq < 20 and so we cannot draw any
strong conclusions about the relative mass distribution of
the two enriched populations.

The observed distribution of surface abundance anoma-
lies are well reproduced by our model which predicts mag-
netic fields only in stars less massive than around 15 Mq.
The rest of the stars in the sample continue to e volve a s
non-magnetic stars as described in iPotter et al.l (|2012bh .
The two distinct populations that we see in Fig. [TT] arc

Stellar evolution with a radiative dynamo 11

-4.45

4.35

550

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

100 200 300

u/km s 1

400

Figure 11. Hunter diagram for the L MC stars observed in the
VLT-FLAMES survey of massive stars jliunter e t al. 2009). Stars
with surface gravity smaller than logjQ^j.ff/cm 2 s — 1 ) = 3.2 are
classified as giants and have been excluded. The effective temper-
ature of each star is also shown.

-2.5

-3

-3.5

200

?;/km s 1

Figure 12. Hunter diagram for a population of stars drawn from
the grid of models shown in Fig. [T] The population undergoes
continuous star formation, is drawn from a Salpeter IMF and
the velocity distribution is Gaussian with mean fi = 145kms — 1
and standard deviation a = 94kms -1 . The number of stars in
each bin as a fraction of the total number of stars is ni. The
magnetic model reproduces well the two distinct populations of
stars observed in the VLT-FLAMES survey. More massive stars
which cannot support a dynamo are enriched by rotational mixing
whereas lower-mass stars are spun down rapidly and are enriched
by magnetic mixing.

Figure 13. Distribution of magnetic field strengths with respect
to mass and rotation rate for a population of stars undergo-
ing continuous star formation. The population is drawn from a
Salpeter IMF and the velocity distribution is Gaussian with mean
fi = 145 kins" 1 and standard deviation a = 94kms — 1 . The gray
region is where stars are not observed in the simulated popula-
tion. Less massive stars are eliminated from the sample because
they have insufficient magnitude for detection. The black region
is for stars that appear in the simulated population but have no
discernible field. We see that the magnetic stars in the sample,
responsible for producing the slowly-rotating, enriched stars in
Fig. U2l come from a narrow region around M = 10 Mq.

reflected by the predictions made in section 13.31 shown in
Fig. 1121 This shows a simulated population of stars between
8 Mq and 20 Mq with our radiative-dynamo model and with
magnetic braking. The mass range is smaller than that of
the full grid shown in Fig. [T] owing to the removal of the
least and most massive stars because of observational effects.
The population w as generated with th e population synthesis
code starmaker (|Brott et al.ll2011b1 'l . It behaves exactly as
we would expect from the VLT-FLAMES data. The stars
initially have a full spread of rotation rates but the magnetic
population spins down rapidly owing to the effects of mag-
netic braking. The magnetic field continues to affect the mix-
ing and these stars become enriched as they age producing a
population of magnetic, slowly rotating, chemically peculiar
stars. More massive stars, where an equilibrium field cannot
be supported by the dynamo, evolve as non-magnetic stars
with hydrodynamic turbulence driving the mixing. This pro-
duces a second population w hose enrichment incr eases with
rotation rate as modelled in lPotter et al.l (|2012bt ). The two
populations are also highlighted in Fig. [13] which shows the
relationship between field strength, mass and rotation rate
in the simulated population. Most of the stars evolve without
magnetic fields but there is a small region, at the lower mass
limit of the sample (M ~ 10 Mq), where stars are predicted
to be magnetic. We note that, because this region is very
narrow, small changes in the boundary between magnetic
and non-magnetic evolution have a significant effect on the

12 A. T. Potter, S. M. Chitre, C. A. Tout

number of magnetic stars in the observed sample. It is possi-
ble this effect could be produced by fossil fields as discussed
in section 13.51 but thus far there is no way to explain why
we see such distinct populations in the VLT-FLAMES data
or why magnetic fields have a higher incidence rate amongst
less massive stars.

We also note that those stars in Fig. [11] with nitrogen
enrichment 6.8 < \og 10 [N/H] < 7.1 and < u/kms" 1 < 150
cannot easily be categorized into either group of stars. They
may be low-mass, fast rotators that have been partially spun
down by magnetic braking, low-mass stars that are born
with slow rotation or high-mass stars that are born with
slow rotation. These stars evolve along a relatively similar
path in the Hunter diagram.

3.7 Variation with different parameters

The model currently contains four parameters which we may
vary independently. If we include possible recalibration of
the Alfven radius by constants of order unity then this in-
creases to five. We may fix the Alfven radius by ensuring
that the population of enriched magnetic stars is confined
to the appropriate band of rotation rates as discussed in sec-
tion [3]6] We can also set Pr c by ensuring that the maximal
enrichment of magnetic stars is the same as in the VLT-
FLAMES data also discussed in section [5~6l The remaining
three parameters may then be varied so that typical field
strengths are of the ord er 10 kG, as observed in magnetic
Ap stars (Mathys 2009). This value is subject to change
though given the scarcity of observations of magnetic stars.
This still leaves a high degree of freedom within the model.
Up to this point we have used C = Pr m = 1 and 7 = 10 -15
but we consider the effect of varying C m and Pr m by an or-
der of magnitude in either direction. We ran our 5 Mq star
initially rotating at 300 kms -1 with magnetic braking. The
effect on a number of parameters is shown in Table [T]

For low magnetic Prandtl numbers it is much more dif-
ficult to sustain the dynamo. The same surface field is re-
produced with smaller dynamo efficiencies but the minimum
sustainable field strength is larger. In the case of small C m
and small Pr m , the field was completely quenched by the
hydrodynamic turbulence as described in section 13.31 A dy-
namo could be sustained for stronger surface fields but only
by increasing the dynamo efficiency significantly. Even for
C m = 1 we found that for a small reduction in 7 the ZAMS
field collapsed.

For higher values of C m , the diffusion of the magnetic
field requires a larger dynamo efficiency in order to main-
tain the same strength field and vice-versa for smaller values
of Cm- For simultaneously large values of C m and Pr m the
field keeps growing monotonically with time during quasi-
homogeneous evolution. This is to be expected when the
dynamo-driven mixing becomes very high. Typically we
could adjust Pr c to compensate.

Regardless of our choice of C m and Pr m , the ratio of the
poloidal and toroidal field strength is well correlated with
the dynamo efficiency. Larger values of the dynamo efficiency
lead to a smaller ratio between the two field strengths. This
is because of the form of equations ((5J and ([6]). Because the
two fields have the same diffusion timescales, their equilibria
depend on the regeneration terms. In the case of the poloidal
field this comes from the a-effect and for the toroidal field

it comes from the shear. In all of our models, the a-effect
is much weaker than the effect of shear and so the poloidal
field strength is much smaller. However if 7 is increased,
increasing the regeneration of the poloidal field but having
little direct effect on the toroidal field, the ratio between the
two becomes much smaller.

There are other aspects of the evolution that are
much more difficult to explain and are related to the non-
linearities in the model and their coupling to the effects of
stellar evolution on nuclear timescales. We might expect the
maximum value of the shear to always be smaller with higher
values of C m because the angular momentum transport is
more efficient but, while this is true in general, it isn't a
simple relationship. Likewise the maximum main-sequence
surface field doesn't seem to correlate with either free pa-
rameter.

In particular, the relative abundance of slow and fast
rotating chemically peculiar stars may be explained by a
shift in the position by mass of the cut-off between magnetic
stars and non-magnetic stars discussed in section [331 The
effect of these free parameters on the position of the cut-off
is something we leave for future work.

4 DISCUSSION

Magnetic fields are one of the most mysterious and least un-
derstood aspects of stellar evolution. The firs t magnetic mas -
sive star was discovered over 65 years ago l|Babcocldll947I )
and yet debate still rages about whether these fields have pri-
mordial origin or are generated by a radiative dynamo acting
within the stellar envelope. Models of magnetic stars must
reproduce the observed phenomenon of magnetic A stars
with unusual surface compositions that have much slower ro -
tation rates than the rest of their population |Mathvsll2004l V
The data from the VLT -FLAMES survey of massive stars
jEvans et al.ll2005l .l 2006) also supports the idea that there
exists a population of stars that are slo wly rotating but ha ve
a high degree of nitrogen enrichment (|Hunter et al.l l2009').

We have presented a simple radiative dynamo model
that arises beca use of the Tayler pinch-type i nstabil-
ity (|Tavlerl I1973T ) and is based on th e mode l of | Spruitl
( 1999 ) which was f urther developed by ISpruid (|2002T ) and
iMaeder fe MevnetJ l|2004l ). Unlike previous work, we have
evolved both the poloidal and toroidal fields as independent
variables at each radius in the star coupled to the angu-
lar momentum distribution of the star. The magnetic fields
evolve according to a latitudinally-averaged induction equa-
tion with the inclusion of an afi-dynamo me chanism derived
from mean-field magnetohydrodynamics l|Schmalz fe Stixl
ll99ll V We introduce a model for ma gnetic braking similar
to that of ud -Doula fe Owockil £2002). The model depends
on a number of parameters, the overall strength of the mag-
netic turbulence, the magnetic Prandtl number, the chemi-
cal Prandtl number, the dynamo efficiency and the critical
ratio of the kinetic energy to the magnetic energy, which de-
fines the Alfven radius. The choices of C m , which affects the
strength of the magnetic turbulence, and Pr c have a strong
effect on the dynamo efficiency needed to sustain the field
but the relation between these parameters and the internal
evolution of the models is complicated.

In models of the magnetic field, when magnetic brak-

Stellar evolution with a radiative dynamo 13

Pr m

max(g)

max(B sm . f /G)

1.93 x 10~ 16

4.2 x 10 9

1.39

3 Ofi X 10 3

0.1

2.40 x 10~ 18

1.1 x 10 11

0.96

7.10 x 10 2

3.53 x 10~ 14

1.2 x 10 s

0.019

1.53 x 10 3

0.1

1.52 x 10~ 16

3.74 x 10 9

1.04

7.40 x lO 2 ' 2 )

0.1

3.00 x 10~ 17 ( 3 >

0.1

1.81 x 10" 14

4.4 x 10 s

0.25

1.27 x 10 3

1.04 x 10~ 14

8.13 x 10 s

0.0089

1.55 x 10 3

0.1

4.47 x 10~ 16

1.95 x 10 10

0.14

8.92 x 10 2

1.58 x lO" 11

2.1 x 10 7

0.033

N/a«

Table 1. The variation of magnetic and stellar parameters with different values for C m and Pr m for a 5Mq star initially rotating at
200 km s -1 with magnetic braking. Each model was taken to have the same equilibrium ZAMS field. The table shows the values of
C m , Pr m and 7 used for each model as well as the maximum internal value of the ratio of the poloidal and toroidal field, rB^/A and
q = <9(log f2)/9(log r), taken at 5 X 10 7 yr. Finally the table shows the maximum value of the surface field during the main sequence. We
note three special entries in the table. (1) This star evolved quasi-homogeneously and produced a monotonically increasing field well
beyond the normal main-sequence lifetime. Therefore defining a maximum main-sequence field was inappropriate. (2) This star evolved
normally but we note that for a slightly smaller value of 7 we were unable to maintain an equilibrium field. This effect was discussed in
section [373] (3) This star is similar to (2) but in this case we were totally unable to maintain an equilibrium field at the desired strength.
We note that for stars (2) and (3), a stronger field can be maintained provided the dynamo-efficiency is sufficiently large.

ing is not included, the field varies only by a factor of a
few during the main sequence. When we include magnetic
braking, the Alfven radius is typically between 10 and 100
times greater than the stellar radius and so angular momen-
tum loss is some 10 3 times greater than from non-magnetic
mass loss alone. The rapid angular momentum loss from the
surface drives additional shear that leads to increased field
generation. In magnetic stars with magnetic braking, the
field increases rapidly at the start of the main sequence be-
fore decaying exponentially. The field strengths at the end
of the main sequence are predicted to be of order 100 G.

We consider a population of stars with this magnetic
model and find two distinct types of behaviour. For stars
more massive than around 15 Mq the Kelvin-Helmholtz tur-
bulence dominates over the magnetic turbulence and a stable
field cannot be sustained by the dynamo. In these cases we
see no appreciable field strength during the main sequence
so the stars evolve according to our normal prescription for
non-magnetic, rotating stars. The predicted field strength is
stronger for rapid rotators but the overall strength does not
depend strongly on the stellar mass except near the limit
at which the dynamo can sustain the field. Although the
magnetic field decays exponentially after an initial peak, it
remains strong enough to have a significant effect on the
chemical evolution of the star. Though the actual mass at
which this dichotomy sets in depends on parameters, the
fact it exists is an important consequence of our model.

If we look at the evolution of an artificially strong initial
field in the absence of any dyna mo action, bu t subject to
the diffusion that arises from the iTavlerl (|l973l ) instability,
we find that reproducing the same TAMS field requires an
initial field several orders of magnitude larger than in the
presence of a dynamo because any fossil field is predicted to
decay exponentially. The fossil field hypothesis suffers from
the problem that we expect the fields in low-mass stars to
decay more than in more massive stars, likely because of
their much longer main-sequence lifetimes. This is opposite
to observed trends which suggest that less massive stars are
more likely to support strong fields than more massive stars

iGrunhut et al.l (|201ll ) . This model also offers no explanation
as to why we see two distinct groups in the Hunter diagram.
Both of these issues are well resolved by our afi-dynamo
model.

We created an artificial populatio n of stars with th e
population synthesis code STARMAKER dBrott et al.ll2011bh .
including the effects of the afi-dynamo and magnetic brak-
ing. The population reflects well the observations of the
VLT-FLAMES survey of massive stars. The survey observed
two distinct populations of stars. The first shows increasing
nitrogen enrichment with rotation rate, the second is a class
of slow-rotating stars that exhibit unusually high nitrogen
abundances compared to the rest of the population. This dis-
tribution of stars is well reproduced by the magnetic model.
The fact that the two very different evolutionary paths arise
naturally from the model is very encouraging to explain why
we observe these two classes of star without having to appeal
to the fossil fields argument.

There are still a number of open questions and further
refinements that need to be made to the model. We have
evolved a magnetic population of stars with the same initial
velocity distribution as the non-magnetic stars. If the ra-
diative dynamo has a strong effect on the pre-mainsequence
evolution then magnetic braking causes magnetic stars to
reach the ZAMS with significantly slower rotation rates than
stars with no sig nificant field. This is indeed observe d in stel-
lar populations (|Mathvsl2004r i . I Alecian" et al.l l|2008l ) also dis-
covered a number of stars on the pre-main sequence which
exhibited significant magnetic activity. They attribute these
to fossil fields by eliminating the possibility that the fields
could be generated by a convective dynamo. However, if a
radiative dynamo operates in these stars it could also be re-
sponsible for the generation of the observed fields. By com-
parison, the observations of IGrunhut et all (|2012T ) suggest
that magnetic stars may reach the main sequence with sig-
nificant rotational velocities. If magnetic stars were born
with slower rotation rates than their non-magnetic coun-
terparts then this would partly explain why the required
dynamo efficiency is so small and why the predicted ratio

14 A. T. Potter, S. M. Chitre, C. A. Tout

between the poloidal and toroidal fields is so large. If mag-
netic stars were born with lower surface rotation rates then
a higher dynamo efficiency would be needed to produce ob-
served magnetic field strengths. This would reduce the dif-
ference between the a-effect and the fi-effect and so the ra-
tio of the strengths of the poloidal and toroidal fields would
be closer to unity. Another possible explanation for why the
predicted dynamo efficiency is so small is that we chose the
radial coordinate as the length scale for the dynamo action.
In reality a more sensible choice may have been the length
scale of the saturated magnetic instabilities, l r (c.f. equa-
tions l|12l) and (JT3J) ) . A shorter length scale would result in
a weaker dynamo and therefore the dynamo efficiency would
need to be higher to sustain the same field strength.

The observed proportion of Ap stars as a f raction of th e
whole population of A stars is roug hly 10% (|Mossll200ll ).
Our grid of models does not yet extend down to the mass
range for A stars (1.4 < M/Mq< 2.1) and so we cannot
yet say whether our population matches this statistic. We
do expect that, given the predicted initial velocity distribu-
tion of massive stars, the population of A stars should still
be dominated by slow rotators that do not support a radia-
tive dynamo. In the mass range of our simulated population,
over 90% of stars in the sample have surface field strength
less than 187 G. This is well below the limit of 300 G antic-
ipate d for the transition to Ap classification |Auriere et al.l
2007). Although our population contains some very massive
stars where we expect smaller field strengths, the form of
the IMF ensures that the population is still dominated by
intermediate-mass stars so the figure for A stars is likely
to be similar. It is also likely that below a certain amount
of shear, a dynamo does not operate. We have not taken
this into account in our simple model. If it is the case, there
may also be a sharp transition between magnetic and non-
magnetic behaviour at low rotation rates.

In our models we have assumed a simple magnetic field
geometry. Even if real fields are generated by dynamo ac-
tion then they may still re lax to stable field configuration s
such as those sugge sted bv lBraithwaite & Nordlu nd ( 2006);
iMathis et all (|201lT ). Further work is needed to determine
how the model might behave differently under these condi-
tions. Further consideration must also be given to the action
of convection on the magnetic field. Does our diffusive model
apply in convective zones and if so is it anisotropic? Further-
more, can we better constrain the free parameters in the sys-
tem, including the efficiency of magnetic braking? Although
data on magnetic stars is scarce, a great deal of progress has
been made possible by surveys such as the VLT-FLAMES
survey of massive stars and the MiMeS project. These pro-
vide sufficient clues to further constrain our existing models.
Additional progress will no doubt be possible thanks to on-
going de velopments in stel l ar observations from the MiMeS
project (|Wade et alj 120091 ; iGrunhut et~aH 1201 ll ) and addi-
tional data on stellar surface compositions thro ugh projects
such as the VLT-FLAMES tarantula survey (I Evans et al.l

Hon]).

5 CONCLUSIONS

We have presented a new model for a radiative a~Q. dy-
namo. The model is based on the Tayler-Spruit dynamo

(Spruit 2002) and incorpo rates magnetic braking based on
lud-Doula fe Owockil ( 2002). The model predicts two distinct
populations of massive stars.

• In stars with masses greater than around 15 Mq , the dy-
na mo cannot be sustain ed. These stars evolve as described
in IPotter et alj l|2012al ); purely hydrodynamic turbulence
caused by rotation results in surface abundance anomalies.
The degree of chemical peculiarity is correlated strongly
with the rotation rate. Less massive stars with low rotation
rates also evolve this way.

• Less massive stars with sufficiently high rotation rates
have an active dynamo and so exhibit strong magnetic fields.
These stars are spun down quickly by magnetic braking and
turbulence causes changes to the surface composition. These
stars appear as slowl y-rotating chemical ly-peculiar stars in
the Hunter diagram (|Hunter et al.ll2009h .

These two populations were observed in the V LT-
FLAMES survey of massive stars l|Hunter et alj [20091 ) and
the predicted number of magnetic st ars in our simulated
sample matches well with observations (Moss 2001). Further
data is needed to confi rm the mass-depend ency of the sim-
ulated field strengths l|Grunhut et al.ll2012T ). Although this
model does not rule out the possibility that magnetic fields
in massive stars have a fossil-field origin, it does strongly
suggest that they may instead be the result of a radiative
a-Q dynamo.

6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ATP thanks I. Brott for allowing use of the STARMAKER code
and the STFC for his studentship. SMC is grateful to the
Cambridge Institute of Astronomy for supporting his sum-
mer visit. CAT thanks Churchill college for his fellowship.

REFERENCES

Alecian E., Wade G. A., Catala C, Folsom C, Grunhut J.,
Donati J.-F., Petit P., Bagnulo S., Marsden S. C, Ramirez
Velez J. C, Landstreet J. D., Boehm T., Bouret J.-C,
Silvester J., 2008, Contributions of the Astronomical Ob-
servatory Skalnate Pleso, 38, 235

Auriere M., Wade G. A., Silvester J., Lignieres F., Bag-
nulo S., Bale K., Dintrans B., Donati J. F., Folsom C. P.,
Gruberbauer M., Hui Bon Hoa A., Jeffers S., Johnson N.,
Landstreet J. D., Lebre A., Lueftinger T., Marsden S.,
Mouillet D., Naseri S., Paletou F., Petit P., Power J., Rin-
con F., Strasser S., Toque N., 2007, A&A, 475, 1053

Babcock H. W., 1947, ApJ, 105, 105

Bagnulo S., Hensberge H., Landstreet J. D., Szeifert T.,

Wade G. A., 2004, A&A, 416, 1149
Bohm-Vitense E., 1958, Zeitschrift fur Astrophysik, 46, 108
Borra E. F., Landstreet J. D., 1978, ApJ, 222, 226
Braithwaite J., Nordlund A., 2006, A&A, 450, 1077
Braithwaite J., Spruit H. C, 2004, Nat., 431, 819
Brandenburg A., 2001, ApJ, 550, 824
Brott I., de Mink S. E., Cantiello M., Langer N., de Koter

A., Evans C. J., Hunter I., Trundle C, Vink J. S., 2011a,

A&A, 530, A115

Stellar evolution with a radiative dynamo 15

Brott I., Evans C. J., Hunter I., de Koter A., Langer N.,
Dufton P. L., Cantiello M., Trundle C, Lennon D. J.,
de Mink S. E., Yoon S.-C, Anders P., 2011b, A&A, 530,
A116

Cowling T. G., 1945, MNRAS, 105, 166

Donati J.-F., Babel J., Harries T. J., Howarth I. D., Petit

P., Semel M., 2002, MNRAS, 333, 55
Donati J.-F., Howarth I. D., Bouret J.-C, Petit P., Catala

C, Landstreet J., 2006a, MNRAS, 365, L6
Donati J.-F., Howarth I. D., Jardine M. M., Petit P., Catala

C, Landstreet J. D., Bouret J.-C, Alecian E., Barnes

J. R., Forveille T., Paletou F., Manset N., 2006b, MNRAS,

370, 629

Donati J.-F., Wade G. A., Babel J., Henrichs H. f., de Jong
J. A., Harries T. J., 2001, MNRAS, 326, 1265

Dufton P. L., Smartt S. J., Lee J. K., Ryans R. S. I., Hunter
L, Evans C. J., Herrero A., Trundle C, Lennon D. J.,
Irwin M. J., Kaufer A., 2006, A&A, 457, 265

Eggleton P. P., 1971, MNRAS, 151, 351

Evans C. J., Lennon D. J., Smartt S. J., Trundle C, 2006,
A&A, 456, 623

Evans C. J., Smartt S. J., Lee J.-K., Lennon D. J., Kaufer
A., Dufton P. L., Trundle C, Herrero A., Simon-Diaz S.,
de Koter A., Hamann W.-R., Hendry M. A., Hunter I., Ir-
win M. J., Korn A. J., Kudritzki R.-P., Langer N., Mokiem
M. R., Najarro F., Pauldrach A. W. A., Przybilla N., Puis
J., Ryans R. S. I., Urbaneja M. A., Venn K. A., Villamariz
M. R., 2005, A&A, 437, 467

Evans C. J., Taylor W. D., Henault-Brunet V., Sana H.,
de Koter A., Simon-Di'az S., Carraro G., Bagnoli T., Bas-
tian N., Bestenlehner J. M., Bonanos A. Z., Bressert E.,
Brott I., Campbell M. A., Cantiello M., Clark J. S., Costa
E., Crowther P. A., de Mink S. E., Doran E., Dufton
P. L., Dunstall P. R., Friedrich K., Garcia M., Gieles M.,
Grafener G., Herrero A., Howarth I. D., Izzard R. G.,
Langer N., Lennon D. J., Mafz Apellaniz J., Markova N.,
Najarro F., Puis J., Ramirez O. H., Sabm-Sanjulian C,
Smartt S. J., Stroud V. E., van Loon J. T., Vink J. S.,
Walborn N. R., 2011, A&A, 530, A108

Grunhut J. H., Rivinius T., Wade G. A., Townsend
R. H. D., Marcolino W. L. F., Bohlender D. A., Szeifert
T., Petit V., Matthews J. M., Rowe J. F., Moffat A. F. J.,
Kallinger T., Kuschnig R., Guenther D. B., Rucinski
S. M., Sasselov D., Weiss W. W., 2012, MNRAS, 419,
1610

Grunhut J. H., Wade G. A., the MiMeS Collaboration,

2011, ArXiv e-prints
Heger A., Langer N., Woosley S. E., 2000, ApJ, 528, 368
Hubrig S., Nesvacil N., Scholler M., North P., Mathys G.,

Kurtz D. W., Wolff B., Szeifert T., Cunha M. S., Elkin

V. G., 2005, A&A, 440, L37
Hunter I., Brott I., Langer N., Lennon D. J., Dufton P. L.,

Howarth I. D., Ryans R. S. I., Trundle C, Evans C. J.,

de Koter A., Smartt S. J., 2009, A&A, 496, 841
Maeder A., 2003, A&A, 399, 263
Maeder A., Meynet G., 2000, A&A, 361, 159
— , 2003, A&A, 411, 543
— , 2004, A&A, 422, 225

Mathis S., Duez V., Braithwaite J., 2011, in IAU Sym-
posium, Vol. 271, IAU Symposium, N. H. Brummell,
A. S. Brun, M. S. Miesch, & Y. Ponty, ed., pp. 270-278

Mathys G., 2004, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 224, The A-

Star Puzzle, J. Zverko, J. Ziznovsky, S. J. Adelman, &
W. W. Weiss, ed., pp. 225-234
— , 2009, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific Conference
Series, Vol. 405, Solar Polarization 5: In Honor of Jan
Stenflo, S. V. Berdyugina, K. N. Nagendra, & R. Ramelli,
ed., p. 473

Meynet C, Maeder A., 2000, A&A, 361, 101
Moss D., 2001, in Astronomical Society of the Pacific
Conference Series, Vol. 248, Magnetic Fields Across the
Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram, G. Mathys, S. K. Solanki,
& D. T. Wickramasinghe, ed., p. 305
— , 2003, A&A, 403, 693

Neiner C, Henrichs H. F., Floquet M., Fremat Y., Preuss
O., Hubert A.-M., Geers V. C, Tijani A. H., Nichols J. S.,
Jankov S., 2003, A&A, 411, 565

Nordhaus J., 2010, in Astronomical Society of the Pa-
cific Conference Series, Vol. 432, New Horizons in Astron-
omy: Frank N. Bash Symposium 2009, L. M. Stanford,
J. D. Green, L. Hao, & Y. Mao, ed., p. 117

Parker E. N., 1958, ApJ, 128, 664

— , 1966, ApJ, 145, 811

Petit V., Wade G. A., 2011, ArXiv e-prints

Pols O. R., Tout C. A., Eggleton P. P., Han Z., 1995, MN-
RAS, 274, 964

Potter A. T., Tout C. A., Eldridge J. J., 2012a, MNRAS,

419, 748
— , 2012b, MNRAS, In Press

Reimers D., 1975, Memoires of the Societe Royale des Sci-
ences de Liege, 8, 369
Schmalz S., Stix M., 1991, A&A, 245, 654
Spruit H. C, 1999, A&A, 349, 189
— , 2002, A&A, 381, 923

Stancliffe R. J., Eldridge J. J., 2009, MNRAS, 396, 1699
Talon S., Zahn J.-P., Maeder A., Meynet G., 1997, A&A,
322, 209

Tayler R. J., 1973, MNRAS, 161, 365
Tout C. A., Pringle J. E., 1996, MNRAS, 281, 219
ud-Doula A., Owocki S. P., 2002, ApJ, 576, 413
Vink J. S., de Koter A., Lamers H. J. G. L. M., 2001, A&A,
369, 574

Wade G. A., Alecian E., Bohlender D. A., Bouret J.-C,
Grunhut J. H., Henrichs H., Neiner C, Petit V., Louis
N. S., Auriere M., Kochukhov O., Silvester J., ud-Doula
A., ud-Doula, 2009, in IAU Symposium, Vol. 259, IAU
Symposium, pp. 333-338

Yousef T. A., Brandenburg A., Riidiger G., 2003, A&A,
411, 321

Zahn J.-P., 1992, A&A, 265, 115